Family snapshots are some of the most precious images I have. No amount of money could buy the value they hold. I treat them as if they were at least as important as any "money" images I shoot..

I shoot everything Raw. I process the family stuff to Jpeg (for ease of sharing and storing) with adjustments that make the most of each shot, and then store everything with sound backups..

A story I have told before..

A few Christmases ago, my mother in law put together a slide show of slides she pestered the family to get at all sorts of functions for over 45 years. The slides were almost random chronologically, badly faded, out of focus, badly composed, very "mundane" subjects, heads with telephone poles out the top, all that bad stuff. They were fascinating!.

The whole family sat around for two hours watching, commenting, laughing, crying, "Look, Grandpa had hair," "Remember that car?", "God, how could we wear that!". Every image had memories and importance to almost everyone in the room..

Since then I have been much more liberal with my family photography whenever they get together..

Never underestimate the importance that time will give to family "snapshots"..

Nothing is enough for the man to whom nothing is enough...

I was nodding my head in agreement reading your reply!.

My story: I shot everything on P&S cameras my whole life. I have albums and albums of my life - all with poles outta peoples heads and bad lighting galore. But these images make me cry and produce fits of laughter for clothing choices, etc., too! They are MEMORIES! When I got my first DSLR - I continued to shoot alot, but less candids, as lugging that DSLR around bothered me. My 4yr old and I are making an ALL ABOUT ME book for her preschool introduction assignment and I HAVE NOTHING really in terms of pictures since I've gotten my DSLR - everything is Portrait-like! Yuck for preschool needs!   Lesson learned! Shoot like crazy, keep all family candids (sure post process, catalogue, BUT BE SURE TO PRINT!), and don't let time go by where you have a gap in candids because suddenly you're too "pro." (Well that's MY story...).

Aletheia wrote:.

Family snapshots are some of the most precious images I have. Noamount of money could buy the value they hold. I treat them as ifthey were at least as important as any "money" images I shoot..

I shoot everything Raw. I process the family stuff to Jpeg (for easeof sharing and storing) with adjustments that make the most of eachshot, and then store everything with sound backups..

A story I have told before..

A few Christmases ago, my mother in law put together a slide show ofslides she pestered the family to get at all sorts of functions forover 45 years. The slides were almost random chronologically, badlyfaded, out of focus, badly composed, very "mundane" subjects, headswith telephone poles out the top, all that bad stuff. They werefascinating!.

The whole family sat around for two hours watching, commenting,laughing, crying, "Look, Grandpa had hair," "Remember that car?","God, how could we wear that!". Every image had memories andimportance to almost everyone in the room..

Since then I have been much more liberal with my family photographywhenever they get together..

Never underestimate the importance that time will give to family"snapshots"..

Nothing is enough for the man to whom nothing is enough..

Jennifer..

I know that my reply didn't answer the original posters questions. LOL..I had the same question. Thanks Alth.Jennifer..

I only shoot jpeg (best setting) whether family shots, weddings etc. and just try to get exposures/white balance correct to minimize post processing (I'm a bit lazy).Duncan Bristowhttp://www.pbase.com/duncanbristow..

That's something that you need to decide for yourself. Are you getting value from shooting Raw?.

The talk about "family shots being the most precious" is a red herring. You'll be taking tens of thousands of family shots over the years, but you only need a few hundred of them for sharing. Nobody is going to sit through a reminiscence of 10,000 photosat even 5 seconds per shot that'd take about 14 hours. You can certainly afford to have a few snaps (or even a lot) that didn't come outvery special occasions such as graduations and weddings aside..

Depending on what kind of camera you use, you might have the option to shoot Raw+JPEG, and then discard the Raw files for those shots that don't make the cut. Or the embedded JPEG preview in the Raw files might be satisfactory if extracted via a program like IrfanView. Either of those approaches leaves your options open..

Wesinatra wrote:.

What do you pros usually do when shooting fmaily snapshots?.

I'm no pro, but I use JPEG for just about anything that doesn't have tricky lighting and isn't particularly important. I'm long past the need to "cover my behind" and "leave my options open". When I take a picture I don't *hope* it will come out, I *expect* it to come out. Only a small percentage of my shots will make the cut anyway, and a blown shot here and there is chump change. Besides, when I do blow a shot it's almost never something that could be adjusted anyway. I simply don't engage in the kind of heroic recovery where Raw becomes valuable..

One of my favorite "What the Duck" comic strips:.

Http://web.mac.com/...iWeb/What%20the%20Duck/THE%20VAULT%202_files/WTD112.jpg..

So you can tell what pictures will be important in 35 years? You know who will die? You remember everything? You can predict divorces, births, health changes, fashion, natural disasters, who will move to Australia, who will become close, who will fade into the past?.

The whole point of my story is that you don't know which images will be very valuable. Some of the most trivial images of today, that many think should be garbaged, will become priceless with the passage of time. If they are of family, keep 'em all. Look after them all..

And you don't ever have to sit down and look at them all in one setting. That would be just stupid. But if you don't have them any more, you can't go find them when you decide you would like to remember..

Nothing is enough for the man to whom nothing is enough...

It's hard to reply to these kinds of comments without seeming to be harsh or making a personal attack. I intend neither, but alas.

I realize that you're insecure about your ability to select which photos to keep. That's fine, we all have our insecurities. But insecurity is not a virtue. It's not appropriate to try to spread your personal insecurities to other people. There's a big difference between "I don't know which images will be very valuable" and "you don't know which images will be very valuable"..

Always feel free to speak for yourself. But it's seldom a good idea to tell somebody else what THEY are unable to do. You will be surprised at what other people can do that you cannot. We all have different talents and abilities..

And back to the original point being discussed: for many (most?) people, discarding photos is just not a Big Deal. It sure isn't a big deal for me. My memory still works fine, photos or no. If stroke or Alzheimer's should take some of my memory (I certainly hope not), a photo won't help. I take photos to have fun, not to have something to fret about. Besides, I'd rather be actually spending time with my family rather than using that time to fuss over photos of them...

Jpeg is a lossy format, and after a few saves it looks like crud at 100%. I use RAW all the time for every pic I take...

You're absolutely right. I don't know what will happen..

It may be projection of my insecurity again, but I think it's absurd to believe anyone does know. So, although I discard a huge percentage of my images shot with sales in mind, I keep family photos..

Nothing is enough for the man to whom nothing is enough...

I originally wanted to save time with the rejects (which in some cases I would still like to keep as "snapshots" and not printable images). But I forgot about the 8-bit image issues (little alone the compression issue as well). It is just that I don't want to spend time processing some 1-3 star ratings just for the sole purpose of keeping them as "snapshot"...never to be printed, but nice to view as a story line of my children's growing up..

RAW + JPG is an option I suppose in this case, but I don't necessarily want to import these 1-3 star rating "snapshots" into Lightroom. I just wanted to take them with my second camera (Nikon D50) and import them directing into my Pictures folder...bypassing the whole import, copyright, and keyword process..

Do most of you just erase or not import these 1-3 strar rating "snapshots" of your family pictures as well and just keep the 4-5 start rated ones?? Or do you spend the time and RAW process all of them, even the not printable ones?.

Thank you again for your suggestions and comments..

Roland YoungRoland Young Photography, LLChttp://www.rolandyoung.com..

Hi Wesinatra,.

This link will answer all your questions,.

Http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/raw.htm.

Worked for me!.

Regards,Gary..

All digital cameras use a proprietary raw format. Its what is read streight off the sensor. But if you could view it on your PC. you couldnt make heads or tails of it, and it iwould be in B&W..

If you think you are viewing the Raw image and see something that makes sence, It has already been processed. Either in the camera or the viewing software. When you save the Raw file to jpg, you are doing exactly the same as the camera does when you tell it to save in jpg. Except - the camera certainly does a better job of it than I do..

When I shoot Raw, which is seldom, I shoot Raw + low res .jpg. That way I can see the picture ( low res .jpg) on any PC..

There are some things that you can do to an image in raw that you have better control over than in jpg or tiff. Full control of white balance is one..

Why do I shoot Raw from time to time, Its part of the learning process...

Canoneyesed wrote:.

Jpeg is a lossy format, and after a few saves it looks like crud.

That says more about your workflow technique than it does about JPEG format. .

At 100%..

What a picture looks like at 100% on a computer monitor is no measure of what it looks like as a print..

I use RAW all the time for every pic I take..

Well, to each his own. Personally I think shooting family album shots in raw is overkill..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Arrowman wrote:.

Well, to each his own. Personally I think shooting family albumshots in raw is overkill..

Well I think i'd have to agree there..

Reading through the posts there are a lot of good ideas and opinions..

My $.02,.

Soudn like you have something of a proces similar to myself..

I pretty much shoot all RAW, mostly becuase I like it, rather than need it. Although I also appreciate teh extra data being there and the results I get from tweaking. I also don't do any sorting or deleting in camera if I can avoid it I prefer to do it on the computer (better to learn that way)..

Now I have never tried using Lightroom so I don't really know about all the nuances of the software. But I don't find straight batch processing RAW files overly time consuming, if you aren't tweaking the settings on the files you just have to get a batch running and go make a cup of tea (PS CS2). I am only speaking for myself and have rarely had to process more than 150 RAW files in one session..

After a photo session, snapshots or other wise. I load all the files into a directory for original files (subdirectories by date with event description). Just the RAW files in these directories (no tiffs or JPEGs etc)..

Next I (like you it seems) scan through all the images to rank them. for this I normally use CS2 (Bridge). (Sometims I use ACDSee to quickly deal with those I want to delete particularly after sports events)..

Once I have tweaked the 5star "keepers", I batch process all the images into 2 directories of JPGS for sharing and easy viewing, 1 main directory for the event and a subdirectory for the outtakes (most often I organize the foder hodling the RAW files this way also). My intention is to go back and eliminate the RAW (outake) files when I need storage space or otherwise tidy up..

CheersJames.

Wesinatra wrote:.

I would like to know what everybody in this forum basically uses forstandard family portraits. Do you use RAW or JPG?? I mainly shootRAW, but I notice that when ranking and sorting them in Lightroom, Ireally don't want to process RAW images that I would normally rank as3 stars or less. But at the sametime, I would like to keep some ofthose "not so good shot", while I still want to keep my keepers in aRAW format for future processing if necessary..

So, any suggestions? What do you pros usually do when shooting fmailysnapshots? Thank you in advance for your suggestions, it is greatlyappreciated!Roland YoungRoland Young Photography, LLChttp://www.rolandyoung.com..

That article is one of the most unbaised, well written, factual presentaitons on the difference between JPEG and RAW that I have ever come across. NOT!.

This is a beginers forum. KR is pretty good at voicing his clearly strong opinon and preference in this article. But makes no attempt to properly explain the subject in a manner suitable for a begginer or otherwise, and does a pretty good job of providing a lot of BS disinformation at the same time..

Begginers should stay away from anything Ken Rockwell writes. Articles like this one should only be read by someone who already has some knowledge on the subject..

Sugesting that this is a good source of informatino on RAW and JPEG is much like directing someone to Rush Limbaugh for an informed view on the environment..

Fly1 wrote:.

Hi Wesinatra,.

This link will answer all your questions,.

Http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/raw.htm.

Worked for me!.

Regards,Gary..

The hate? page (sort of says it all) KR refers to is worth more than one look at..

Http://www.prime-junta.net/...How_to/o_RAW_workflow/_RAW_workflow.html?page=2.

Fly1 wrote:.

Hi Wesinatra,.

This link will answer all your questions,.

Http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/raw.htm.

Worked for me!.

Regards,Gary..

Arrowman wrote:.

Canoneyesed wrote:.

Jpeg is a lossy format, and after a few saves it looks like crud.

That says more about your workflow technique than it does about JPEGformat. .

Hmmm...Sure does!!.

Jpeg is a compact format for original shooting, and is similarly small and useful for final storage... but it isn't designed for multiple saves. All intermediate edits should be stored in something lossless, like the "home" format of the editing software, 'psd' for Photoshop, say. This also identifies those files as ones that are "under construction", as it were..

Well, to each his own. Personally I think shooting family albumshots in raw is overkill..

Agree.Regards,Baz..

Personally I always shoot RAW unless I am in continuous shooting mode and the limitation with RAW (7 shots on my Canon 20D) is too restricting. Like you, I use Lightroom. Also, like you, I take a lot of family shots..

I find that my most difficult problem after a shoot is deciding what to do with the shots: what am I going to print, what am I going to e-mail, etc. I always dump immediately any shots that are technically faulty. In addition, since I normally have multiple shots of the same scene, I try to have the discipline the review each set of similar shots and only keep the best one or two of each set. I find this to be the most difficult and time consuming part of the whole process, although Lightroom makes it much easier..

All of this is the same whatever format you are shooting..

I only "process" RAW files when I need to do something with them. If I am going to e-mail or print them, I adjust them in Lightroom (typically 1 minute per file) and batch export them (5 secs per file) when I have finished. I print from Qimage, not Lightroom. I keep the exported files for a month or so in case I want to reprint them, but delete them at regular intervals to avoid clogging up my hard drive. I can always re-export them from Lightroom if I need them again..

If I need to process anything in Photoshop, I try to keep the final PSD file only in the LR database. Very rarely I will keep more than one PSD version..

I always finish up with quite a lot of images that I don't want to do anything with now but might conceivably (low probability) need in the future. I leave them in RAW (and in the LR database) without any processing..

I do not believe that there is any overhead in this workflow in starting with RAW files compared with starting with JPEGs. Before I switched to RAW, I found that the big problem with JPEGs was that I invariably finished up with multiple copies of the same file. With RAW I have one copy (RAW) only or 2 (RAW+PSD) at the most..

The main objection that I can see to keeping images long term in RAW format rather than JPEG or TIFF, is that RAW formats, apart from DNG, are proprietary and may not be supported in, say, 20 years time. This is an issue I will have to address at some time.Chris R..

Barrie Davis wrote:.

Arrowman wrote:.

Canoneyesed wrote:.

Jpeg is a lossy format, and after a few saves it looks like crud.

That says more about your workflow technique than it does about JPEGformat. .

Hmmm...Sure does!!....

Regards,Baz.

HMMMM Sure does NOT! Don't you get what I was saying? I don't use jpg because it WOULD lose detail if I did that. Obviously if I don't use JPG then I don't do that now do I?! It isn't really saying anything about my workflow because it isn't part of my workflow at all..

Of course I'm going to save it in a non lossy format whether I use jpg or not. So as long as I'm converting I might as well convert RAW to TIFF instead of JPG to TIFF. And I'll be able to change exposure and white balance while you poor sods with your oh so holier than thou workflow can't. Of course I know you never need to because your pictures are perfect straight from the camera. Yeah and I'm Santa Claus..

Canoneyesed wrote:.

Barrie Davis wrote:.

Hmmm...Sure does!!....

HMMMM Sure does NOT! Don't you get what I was saying? I don't use jpgbecause it WOULD lose detail if I did that. Obviously if I don't useJPG then I don't do that now do I?! It isn't really saying anythingabout my workflow because it isn't part of my workflow at all..

What you actually wrote was.. "I never use jpeg"......

....which, presumably, means you never use it for what it is GOOD for, notwithstanding it's use or non-use for multiple repeat saves .... which, we can all agree, jpeg is NOT good for..

Of course I'm going to save it in a non lossy format whether I usejpg or not. So as long as I'm converting I might as well convert RAWto TIFF instead of JPG to TIFF. And I'll be able to change exposureand white balance while you poor sods with your oh so holier thanthou workflow can't. Of course I know you never need to because yourpictures are perfect straight from the camera. Yeah and I'm SantaClaus.

Jeeeze ! [Have you considered getting counselling for that chip on the shoulder you seem to be toting for some reason?]Regards,Baz..

Canoneyesed wrote:.

HMMMM Sure does NOT! Don't you get what I was saying? I don't use jpgbecause it WOULD lose detail if I did that. Obviously if I don't useJPG then I don't do that now do I?! It isn't really saying anythingabout my workflow because it isn't part of my workflow at all..

If you think a workflow involving jpg must involve multiple saves to the point where the result looks like "crud" then yes, this does say something about your understanding of workflow and the file formats in question..

Of course I'm going to save it in a non lossy format whether I usejpg or not. So as long as I'm converting I might as well convert RAWto TIFF instead of JPG to TIFF. And I'll be able to change exposureand white balance while you poor sods with your oh so holier thanthou workflow can't. Of course I know you never need to because yourpictures are perfect straight from the camera..

Actually, most of the time I do find that for me, the first step in raw processing is to get the image up to the standard of the accompanying jpg. .

And if fiddling with white balance and exposure is such an indispensible part of your workflow, even for family snaps, well....

But I'm not being "holier than thou", I'm not the one making broad and unjustified generalisations about the desirability of one file format over another..

What did you do when you shot film? Or have you ever shot film?.

Yeah and I'm Santa Claus.

As Baz said - settle down, for crying out loud..

No-one is denying that raw is preferable to jpg for ultimate pixel-peeping quality..

But claiming that jpg results in "crud" and that raw should be the only format of choice for everything including family album shots, is just - well - religious, and unjustified...